Author
Topic: DLNA Support? (Read 21123 times)

LMCE supports lots of network Plug & Play. Does it support DLNA? Or even the actual UPNP standard, of which DLNA is a strict implementation?

DLNA support would mean that LMCE would itself become plug & play on networks with other DLNA equipment, whether DLNA clients or servers. LMCE installs could use various DLNA devices without sweating it. Is it already in there, or maybe just a little development away?

Thanks for the pointer. Though UPNP isn't quite DLNA, and evidently LMCE UPNP isn't quite UPNP, though it does seem to support control points. I have asked someone with superior UPNP experience, who seems to be working on that feature in LMCE, to go for full DLNA support.

Thanks for the pointer. Though UPNP isn't quite DLNA, and evidently LMCE UPNP isn't quite UPNP, though it does seem to support control points. I have asked someone with superior UPNP experience, who seems to be working on that feature in LMCE, to go for full DLNA support.

you mean RonInSd: "3) Upgrade the UPnP services to support the RemoteUI part of UPnP. I am still doing some research into the UPnP RemoteUI specs. I know that some of the newer Media Extenders have some support for UPnP RemoteUI. "? Circular reference?

ok, let me get things straight for you:1.) the control point in libupnp (the intel library) does only support listing media2.) Net::UPnP uses libupnp3.) we need a media controller4.) please read http://www.cidero.com/mediaController.html first

Not really. I never offered to do anything. All I did was ask whether DLNA is supported. You pointed me to a UPNP dependency thread, wherein I found someone better qualified than I to work on it, so I basically asked them the same question, as a means of encouraging them to do what evidently we both want, and what they're already doing. The other specific request that you came up with was that I extend Net::UPnP to support control points, which it already does.

So it's really unclear why you're beating up on me. Especially since you've done the opposite of answer my question of whether LMCE DLNA is "just around the corner", unless you were sending me a coded message that all it requires is fixing Net::UPnP in some way that seems to possibly be adding underlying control point support to libupnp, not the Perl library, or perhaps implement it in Perl. Am I starting to see a glimmer here?

My system has Ushare http://ushare.geexbox.org/ installed by default (I never added it) which claims to support DLNA. Perhaps making sure its working right would be a priority. And Myth's UPNP is also working. At least my Vista laptop finds it.

sorry, i had the impression you wanted to get involved with developement

I do want to get involved with development. But I never offered to implement DLNA. Perhaps I might have, if I'd gotten an encouraging response to my basic question of whether it was already working or not. But instead of "it needs N" or even a "not yet", or even no one responding because no one has anything constructive to say, I got a snide response that isn't encouraging at all. And it's hard to believe that you're "sorry", when you continued to attack me elsewhere for just asking about status.

If LMCE were well documented, so the wiki or other docs showed the status of promised or useful features, maybe my questions wouldn't be well placed. If it were easier to find which source code supports which semi-documented feature, it might be more productive to look through the source rather than ask in a forum where people are already more familiar with that source. But it's not. So simple answers to my reasonable questions also help inform anyone else who sees the responses (or lack thereof). So I will continue to ask them.

So, please with sugar and cherry on top: if you want to get involved start with _anything_ now. Maybe you want to do a schema map of the pluto_main database with dia, visio or such? (please, please please?)So you can say then: i did some of the documentation instead of simply wheening for it. I have no problem researching the upnp stuff in the codebase for you, but you have to involve, too. And asking for things that are documented is not really helpful.

So, please with sugar and cherry on top: if you want to get involved start with _anything_ now. Maybe you want to do a schema map of the pluto_main database with dia, visio or such? (please, please please?)So you can say then: i did some of the documentation instead of simply wheening for it. I have no problem researching the upnp stuff in the codebase for you, but you have to involve, too. And asking for things that are documented is not really helpful.

What I resent is your implication that I'm doing nothing and asking for everything from people who are doing everything and asking for nothing. All I asked for was whether DLNA was supported, when UPNP seems to be (though it turns out that it's incomplete). You replied with a smiley asking vaguely to add contact point support to a Perl module that already has it, - how was I to guess that the underlying library doesn't support the Perl module? When you could have told me that directly, instead of wasting my time with (invisible) sarcasm. On sqlCVS, the page to which I linked about the "new collaborative development method" describes the GSD wizard and sqlCVS as if they're working. The forum thread that I did read showed that it might be working, but not in conclusive terms. So I asked. What's the harm in replying "looks like it, we're not done testing", instead of slamming me?

And yes, you certainly did attack me in these posts, with insults and demands that I implement systems just because I asked, citing references indicating they exist, whether in fact they do or not. As you just did again with your sarcasm.

I don't need begging to participate. I already do participate, as I just explained, in the wiki, in Mantis, and in the forums - in just a month and a half (including a 2 week vacation), on a system that still isn't working well enough for me to use. What helps me, and anyone else, participate more is better answers to project navigation questions, and better docs so those questions can in fact be answered with some reasearch. What LMCE needs is some developer help. I'd say that my questions and participation are helping get that developer help, including from me. I'm going to continue - for my own reasons, not because you're sarcastically asking me "nicely". Maybe once my contributions come in a form you more easily recognize - like if I work on your pet project - we'll get along better. I'm looking forward to that.